Gambling is a common phenomenon of which we all have some knowledge.
Today, we have the pleasure to invite Dr Liu Hsin I to share his view on
the topic from sociological perspective. Please note that the discussion
of gambling in this interview refers only to the gambling in public sphere.
Following is the abstract of the interview due to the limitation of time.

1. Q: How do sociologists view the phenomenon
of gambling?
A: In the view of Max Weber, gambling
is a kind of rational social action. It's rationality simply because it
always involves the (rational) calculation of probability. However, gambling
is also irrational or at least non-rational, because it is driven by instincts,
which is not simply biological but always socially and culturally cultivated.
Like many social phenomenon, gambling is a contradictory combination of
different forces.

2. Q: In the society, is gambling related
to class?
A: Gambling is class-related. In
Hong Kong society, people in the lower class has fewer opportunities for
moving up in the social ladder. Under this circumstance, gambling serves
as an accessible way for them to move up the social ladder.

3. Q: Many people think that there are
many disadvantages of gambling, such as addiction and bankruptcy and etc.,
however, the government still legalizes certain kinds of gambling. What
functions do gambling have from the functionalist perspective?
A: No matter how socially-culturally cultivated
it is, gambling is driven by instinct, which needs outlet occasionally.
The governmental legalization of certain kind of gambling serves as a safety-valve
for such energy. The existence of the legalized channels for gambling may
prevent from the irrational way of gambling. The legalization of gambling
enables the government to levy tax on the activity, which is good for the
economy--the "collective interests." In the name of collective interests,
some "personal problem"--like addiction and bankruptcy--can always
be ignored.

4. Q: Someone has proposed to build casinos
in Hong Kong, and the Financial Secretary Mr. Tsang said that he needed
to consider the proposal carefully. What kind of factors do you think the
government needs to consider when weighing the advantage and disadvantage
of building casinos in Hong Kong?
A: Casino represents the "ideal
type" in gambling--in Weber's term. Under the roof of casino, it is very
easy for any government to administer and servile gambling. Nevertheless,
since Hong Kong already has a lot of legalized channels for gambling and
outlets for people's instincts of gambling, building casinos is no longer
a matter of releasing gambling instincts but encouraging gambling behavior.
Although building casinos bring more tax revenue to Hong Kong's economy,
economy is never the only factor that a government should take into consideration.
Morality is another factor which is vital to any mode of governing. The
balance of moral and economic interests should always concern Hong Kong
government.

5. Q: what do you think about the relationship
between gambling and the division of labor ?
A: There is a correlation between gambling and the division of labour.
Karl Marx's concept of "alienated labor" argues that modern people who
specialize in fragmentated works have little sense of the totality of their
work and have little control over the whole production process. In this
way, such specialization and fragmentation prevent people from realizing
their human potential as a 'total man', and humans lack a sense of satisfaction
in their works. Under this human condition, gambling, for some people,
is the way to exercise and demonstrate self-control over their daily lives.
In the process of gambling, people can make their own choices and take
the responsibilities.

6. Q: Gambling in the internet has become
quite ardent nowadays, but individual government find it very hard to regular
or prohibit it. What is the effect of the globalization of gambling on
the people's livelihood?
A: In Hong Kong's case, the effect of
the globalization of gambling on people's livelihood is not much. After
all, people who gamble in the internet need to be computer-literate, and
there are only a few of them in Hong Kong.

7. Q: In Hong Kong's TV channels, there
are live horse racing and after match analysis. In the magazine and newspaper,
there are also special columns on horse racing. What is the effect of mass
media on gambling?
A: Mass media always reflect and shape. There is no exception for the
case of gambling.

8. Q: Movies films reflect the culture
of a society. In Hong Kong's Movies, gambler is either portrayed as hero
or rascal. What value concept does this dichotomy represent?
A: Every society is a society of distinction. The distinction such
as good/bad, moral/immoral, rational /irrational serves the interests of
the powerful, therefore knowledge is a discursive formation of power. In
Hong Kong's movies, the image of gambler is quite vague. It shows that
the social nature of gambling is not yet defined in this society. As the
image of gambler shifts from hero to villain, the knowledge of gambling
swings back and forth between good and evil, moral and immoral. Such vagueness
informs us that there is still power struggle to define gambling in the
society and the final judgement on gambling may never be made.

9. Q: Is there any gender difference in
gambling?
A: Surely there is a gender difference
in gambling. In any institutionalized gambling, less women take part in
it than men do, such as in Hong Kong's horse-racing. It shows that women
are still the underprivileged gender in the society, and there is no exception
in gambling.

10. Q: In Hong Kong, horse-racing and mark
six are legal gambling, while other forms of gambling are defined as illegal,
such as horse-racing organized by other groups rather than the Jockey Club.
Yet their nature are the same. Why there is a distinction between the legal
and the illegal?
A: From the economic perspective, it is
the matter of tax. From the moral perspective, it has to do with the power
struggle for political leadership in the society. In Hong Kong, the power
to define legal/illegal is still in the hands of the ruling elite. One
of the most important functions for distinguishing legal and illegal is
to constrain the individual freedom in the name of collective interests.